Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 BlackoCatto wrote:

Spoiler:

 alextroy wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I say follow the example of other 9th Edition Codexes:

The normal Leman Russ gains Core keyword.

The Tank Commander keeps his BS 3+.

Most Orders only work on Core Leman Russ, but are reworked so that some also work on multiple units.

Tank Commander gains rule that he cannot be targeted while within X" of 2 or more Core Leman Russ.

Now you have a worthy HQ for a Tank Spearhead, but not a great choice to splash into an Infantry Patrol/Battalion in place of normal Leman Russ.

I'd guess this is closest to what gw will do in the new Guard codex. It would help fix the problem of Tank Commanders just being a better Leman Russ, but wouldn't fix the main problems of Leman Russes in general, eg: poor survivability and firepower on the main guns. I'd give them a 2+ and make the battle cannon 2d6 shots, regardless of how far they moved, and flat 3D instead d3D.

BlackoCatto wrote:If you want people to take a regular Russ, or in fac a Russ at all in this edition, make them cheaper for what they can do or make them stronger in regards to output at their current price. That will get more on the table.

Exactly. They are two different, but interrelated, issues. The Tank Commander being a better Russ and the normal Russ not being good enough for it's points. Just because you fix one problem doesn't mean you should ignore the other.

I'd say a cheaper if slightly worst Russ would be better than a more powerful for the same points unit. I say spike Grinding Advance, improve the bad weapons, and reduce the base points to make the value of a Demolisher Cannon Russ with no sponsons a little less than a Space Marine Vindicator.

Exactly. The issue I have is that by taking the ability to order themselves away from a TC doesn't make the regular Russ better, it just makes one worse and the other the same, still leaving a TC a far better option still. Price reduction Is a good way to bring it on as it means there is a value that can be brought along side a better weapon. A TC should be better but a pricey option while the regular Russ a cheap but more numerous option .

If you take the ability to self-Order away, and don't change the points, do you really think people will continue to pay 35 points for +1 to hit (and being vulnerable to any rules that target the keyword CHARACTER)?

I think the point is there are two separate issues at play.
1. Leman Russes aren't very good.
2. Tank Commanders are just better Leman Russes rather than actual leaders.

Preventing the Commander from ordering himself solves issue 2, but does not solve issue 1.
Hence the change should be implemented alongside other changes such as increased lethality, increased durability, and/or reduced points cost.

And I don't think anyone advocating for removing self-Ordering has said anything different.

Exactly how you go about it - especially given GW's allergy to higher T values - is another matter entirely.

 Dysartes wrote:

 BlackoCatto wrote:

Spoiler:

 alextroy wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I say follow the example of other 9th Edition Codexes:

The normal Leman Russ gains Core keyword.

The Tank Commander keeps his BS 3+.

Most Orders only work on Core Leman Russ, but are reworked so that some also work on multiple units.

Tank Commander gains rule that he cannot be targeted while within X" of 2 or more Core Leman Russ.

Now you have a worthy HQ for a Tank Spearhead, but not a great choice to splash into an Infantry Patrol/Battalion in place of normal Leman Russ.

I'd guess this is closest to what gw will do in the new Guard codex. It would help fix the problem of Tank Commanders just being a better Leman Russ, but wouldn't fix the main problems of Leman Russes in general, eg: poor survivability and firepower on the main guns. I'd give them a 2+ and make the battle cannon 2d6 shots, regardless of how far they moved, and flat 3D instead d3D.

BlackoCatto wrote:If you want people to take a regular Russ, or in fac a Russ at all in this edition, make them cheaper for what they can do or make them stronger in regards to output at their current price. That will get more on the table.

Exactly. They are two different, but interrelated, issues. The Tank Commander being a better Russ and the normal Russ not being good enough for it's points. Just because you fix one problem doesn't mean you should ignore the other.

I'd say a cheaper if slightly worst Russ would be better than a more powerful for the same points unit. I say spike Grinding Advance, improve the bad weapons, and reduce the base points to make the value of a Demolisher Cannon Russ with no sponsons a little less than a Space Marine Vindicator.

Exactly. The issue I have is that by taking the ability to order themselves away from a TC doesn't make the regular Russ better, it just makes one worse and the other the same, still leaving a TC a far better option still. Price reduction Is a good way to bring it on as it means there is a value that can be brought along side a better weapon. A TC should be better but a pricey option while the regular Russ a cheap but more numerous option .

If you take the ability to self-Order away, and don't change the points, do you really think people will continue to pay 35 points for +1 to hit (and being vulnerable to any rules that target the keyword CHARACTER)?

No, which is why TCs should keep the ability to order themselves.

I don't think anyone's advocating that removing the ability to order themselves should be the ONLY change made.

I think everyone is in agreement that both vehicles need overall buffs rather than nerfs.

 BlackoCatto wrote:
No, which is why TCs should keep the ability to order themselves.

I'll repeat what I said to you on page 2:

 catbarf wrote:
Yes, this would be a mild nerf to the order-giving ability of Tank Commanders. That's why we're also talking about points changes, which could more than offset it- as an extreme example, if Tank Commanders had their price cut in half while also getting these limitations on their Orders, they'd become the best unit in the codex in spite of the 'nerf'. Please exercise just the little bit of abstract thinking necessary to contemplate a points reduction and other things being changed too.

No

 BlackoCatto wrote:
No

...you don't really get the whole "discussion" side of "discussion forum", do you?

catbarf (and anyone else who actually wants to have a discussion), we've got a 35 point differential at present - if we assume no self-Order, how much would you shrink that by, and would your answer change if a TC got the ability to Order two Leman Russ instead of one?

T8/12W/3+ is a Leman Russ, T8/16W/2+ is a Land Raider - 14/13/10 vs 14/14/14, from memory. Given the Land Raider has only just been reprinted, that doesn't leave much room to move on the Russ statline. Maybe T8/16W/3+?

Also, I can see the SMOKESCREEN keyword (and associated stratagem) coming into play when the IG book gets redone, which'll be annoying.

Maybe, maybe not on Smokescreen for Guard vehicles. It was given to CSM vehicles in the Compendium, but not to Guard vehicles. Could just be a marine thing. Would make some sense, as marines generally field fewer, more expensive vehicles, and protecting one per turn is more useful to them than the Guard, who generally have several less expensive vehicles in a list. Smokescreen is better for a single Sicaran than an entire squadron of Leman Russes.

Making Tank Aces an upgrade you pay for in points could be better for Guard vehicles. Being able to make all your Russes Up Armoured for X points could be a good option, and harken back to the old Extra Armour upgrade.

Are we seriously trying to talk about nerfing the Imperial Guard in any way shape or form? If anything they need a buff they're one of the worst armies in the game right now and tank commanders are pretty much the one thing they have going for them

 gmaleron wrote:
Are we seriously trying to talk about nerfing the Imperial Guard in any way shape or form? If anything they need a buff they're one of the worst armies in the game right now and tank commanders are pretty much the one thing they have going for them

Not nerf them, just some of us don't agree with the idea of a russ having 2d6 shots.
How many shots do you give a rapid fire battle cannon if a battle cannon is 2d6 shots? 4d6 shots

Sure they don't justify their 200 point cost given the lethality of 9th. But adding to the lethality isnt a good solution.
Look at the issues grinding advance caused with balancing the demolisher cannon between vehicals with and without it.

I agree that guard is doing horrible, I am in NO way saying they should be nerfed in ANY way, Im just saying bringing 3 tank commanders and no tanks is super unfluffy, also this is about ways to buff the leman russ to make them more viable

 gmaleron wrote:
Are we seriously trying to talk about nerfing the Imperial Guard in any way shape or form?

At this point I have to wonder if people are not reading the entirety of OP's post or are simply unable to consider the aggregate effects of buffs and nerfs applied simultaneously.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dysartes wrote:
...you don't really get the whole "discussion" side of "discussion forum", do you?

catbarf (and anyone else who actually wants to have a discussion), we've got a 35 point differential at present - if we assume no self-Order, how much would you shrink that by, and would your answer change if a TC got the ability to Order two Leman Russ instead of one?

I don't mean to cop out but I think the point differential based on the order should depend on the base cost of a Russ. Re-rolling 1s confers a 17% increase in lethality but no increase in durability, so I'd start at a baseline value of that ability of 8-10% of the cost of a Russ. A TC innately hits 33% more often than a base Russ, so I would say 15-20% premium. So, if a Russ were dropped to, say, 120pts, that implies a TC with two orders should be 165pts. That seems high, but 155pts feels more reasonable. So for 30% more than a Russ, you get +1BS and the ability to order two tanks. Does that seem reasonable?

 catbarf wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
...you don't really get the whole "discussion" side of "discussion forum", do you?

catbarf (and anyone else who actually wants to have a discussion), we've got a 35 point differential at present - if we assume no self-Order, how much would you shrink that by, and would your answer change if a TC got the ability to Order two Leman Russ instead of one?

I don't mean to cop out but I think the point differential based on the order should depend on the base cost of a Russ. Re-rolling 1s confers a 17% increase in lethality but no increase in durability, so I'd start at a baseline value of that ability of 8-10% of the cost of a Russ. A TC innately hits 33% more often than a base Russ, so I would say 15-20% premium. So, if a Russ were dropped to, say, 120pts, that implies a TC with two orders should be 165pts. That seems high, but 155pts feels more reasonable. So for 30% more than a Russ, you get +1BS and the ability to order two tanks. Does that seem reasonable?

Seems a reasonable logic, though I'd personally prefer the base Russ getting mild buffs to survival / damage output and making them worth their current points cost to dropping the points of them in a race to the bottom.

As I've said a few times already, I'd also prefer more tank orders that can compete with reroll 1s.

I'd prefer them to get buffs vs point drops, I want the tank to be imposing on the battlefield, not turn into a meme about how the emperor is the king of mass production

 kurhanik wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
...you don't really get the whole "discussion" side of "discussion forum", do you?

catbarf (and anyone else who actually wants to have a discussion), we've got a 35 point differential at present - if we assume no self-Order, how much would you shrink that by, and would your answer change if a TC got the ability to Order two Leman Russ instead of one?

I don't mean to cop out but I think the point differential based on the order should depend on the base cost of a Russ. Re-rolling 1s confers a 17% increase in lethality but no increase in durability, so I'd start at a baseline value of that ability of 8-10% of the cost of a Russ. A TC innately hits 33% more often than a base Russ, so I would say 15-20% premium. So, if a Russ were dropped to, say, 120pts, that implies a TC with two orders should be 165pts. That seems high, but 155pts feels more reasonable. So for 30% more than a Russ, you get +1BS and the ability to order two tanks. Does that seem reasonable?

Seems a reasonable logic, though I'd personally prefer the base Russ getting mild buffs to survival / damage output and making them worth their current points cost to dropping the points of them in a race to the bottom.

As I've said a few times already, I'd also prefer more tank orders that can compete with reroll 1s.

Totally agreed on both counts. Just dropping the points on Russes doesn't make them feel like an MBT, just cannon fodder; and it'd be nice for orders to be useful, situational buffs rather than just re-roll 1s because that's the best you've got.

Concerning lethality, one issue is that a weapon like the battle cannon barely kills a single marine with its 1d6 shots whereas it used to blow holes in squads of them. Without the extra shots, it just lacks in lethality. The same goes for many other former ordnance weapons. That makes for a pretty disappointing tank. And it's not just marines. Even against the softest of targets it barely does anything, and against vehicles it's pretty disappointing as well. Of course, other weapons are a bit better, but even then, out of the whole list, there aren't that many that are worth it. And without the double shots, the Russ really is a joke in terms of firepower.

Add to that the rather poor survivability, and it's no surprise that no one ever takes a basic Russ. Tank Commanders make it a little more useful because of the better chances to hit paired with the order (that simply is most efficient on the more effective platform.and so will always go there).

Going further down in points isn't much of an option because, well, by that point they basically become so disposable that they won't be fun to use anymore. People want their tanks to mean something.

For the Tank Commanders, the better skill is something I don't see going away because that is how GW has always defined its characters. They have better and more heroic stats, even though I would be perfectly satisfied with having my officers having the exact same stats as regular guardsmen really. The higher skill however means that it will always be a case of one being better than the other, no matter what you do. The two units are far too similar to not compete. It's the same as with all the different power weapons for instance. They're so similar that there will always be a best option.

Of course, they could try something with special rules. Or rather, they will try something with special rules, but I don't see that gaining anything because it will be really hard to justify the standard Russ being better in some way. The Re-roll ones to hit while shooting van be justified from orders, to only apply to the basic Russ, but for instance something like Full Throttle makes no sense at all to only work on other tanks (sidestepping the whole silliness of orders in general. They're about as silly as auras of a non-technological non-magical nature).

So, the only real way to not see only commanders or standard russes I can see is making the commander a better Russ, but part of a squadron that one tank can be upgraded to once there are three Russes. That way, you will always have a ratio but people will still want to do the upgrade. Of course, that still requires something to boost the basic tank in some way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Concerning lethality, one issue is that a weapon like the battle cannon barely kills a single marine with its 1d6 shots whereas it used to blow holes in squads of them. Without the extra shots, it just lacks in lethality. The same goes for many other former ordnance weapons. That makes for a pretty disappointing tank. And it's not just marines. Even against the softest of targets it barely does anything, and against vehicles it's pretty disappointing as well. Of course, other weapons are a bit better, but even then, out of the whole list, there aren't that many that are worth it. And without the double shots, the Russ really is a joke in terms of firepower.

Add to that the rather poor survivability, and it's no surprise that no one ever takes a basic Russ. Tank Commanders make it a little more useful because of the better chances to hit paired with the order (that simply is most efficient on the more effective platform.and so will always go there).

Going further down in points isn't much of an option because, well, by that point they basically become so disposable that they won't be fun to use anymore. People want their tanks to mean something.

For the Tank Commanders, the better skill is something I don't see going away because that is how GW has always defined its characters. They have better and more heroic stats, even though I would be perfectly satisfied with having my officers having the exact same stats as regular guardsmen really. The higher skill however means that it will always be a case of one being better than the other, no matter what you do. The two units are far too similar to not compete. It's the same as with all the different power weapons for instance. They're so similar that there will always be a best option.

Of course, they could try something with special rules. Or rather, they will try something with special rules, but I don't see that gaining anything because it will be really hard to justify the standard Russ being better in some way. The Re-roll ones to hit while shooting van be justified from orders, to only apply to the basic Russ, but for instance something like Full Throttle makes no sense at all to only work on other tanks (sidestepping the whole silliness of orders in general. They're about as silly as auras of a non-technological non-magical nature).

So, the only real way to not see only commanders or standard russes I can see is making the commander a better Russ, but part of a squadron that one tank can be upgraded to once there are three Russes. That way, you will always have a ratio but people will still want to do the upgrade. Of course, that still requires something to boost the basic tank in some way.

yeah the bc went from bane of existence for marines of any flavour to, oh 2 marines died .. anyways, time to use the two meltas on it and bracket it down and use the remaining 6 boltguns to fire 12 shots into the guardsmen next to it..

Points should be the last thing to be adjusted. Like many units in the game, the Leman Russ platform has a bunch of issues with its actual rules. Some examples being:

Internal weapon balance is a mess with some choices needing a fundamental rewrite.
Grinding advance being a sloppy fix
TC/Russ interaction and balance
Overall vehicle survivability

Once the rules allow the unit the do what it needs to do, then you go through and tweak the points.

 Chris521 wrote:
Points should be the last thing to be adjusted. Like many units in the game, the Leman Russ platform has a bunch of issues with its actual rules. Some examples being:

Internal weapon balance is a mess with some choices needing a fundamental rewrite.
Grinding advance being a sloppy fix
TC/Russ interaction and balance
Overall vehicle survivability

Once the rules allow the unit the do what it needs to do, then you go through and tweak the points.

I'm inclined to wonder how much we can fix the TC/Russ without fixing some of the base rules, though. For example, I recall the Vanquisher being a decent choice (never the best, perhaps, but at least something you could honestly consider as an option) back when tanks could be downed in a single hit. GW has seemed pretty resistant to changing the basic statline of the gun, however, so it would seem that the only option to make the gun worthwhile right now is some bespoke rule for it (which I'm not sure GW would do, and if they did I don't believe they would be competent to make the rule effective without being overpowered).

 alextroy wrote:
I think they should be a synergistic combination. A Tank Commander and a normal Russ should be better than two Tank Commanders.

Yes, this. Would be my preference.

Having a Tank Commander actually 'command' a squadron of Leman Russ tanks, making them more powerful as a whole than the sum of their parts, is both fluffy and (I feel) more interesting on the table top. Maintaining a 'command range', maybe 12" say, from the tank commander should give some bonus to each Russ as they coordinate their fire and movement. Not sure quite how t pull it off so a TC is less effective on its own, but I'm sure there's a way.

Considering the original post I see two problems to address. The first is the underperformance of the Leman Russ. Any fixes to the baseline Leman Russ would, of course, help the Tank Commander. The second problem is that we see Tank Commanders without any tanks under their command less their own panzer. This is a "fluff/feel" issue but I think it's real.

Regarding the overall Leman Russ design, I'd like to see Leman Russ have a more sensible Battle Cannon. Maybe get rid of the Vanquisher and have two profiles for the standard battle cannon: a Blast setting with a decent ROF and a "Sabot" setting with something like a better Lascannon (less variable damage perhaps: 3+D3 or something?). Second, it would be great if they were more survivable. Leman Russes don't do very well on a tabletop populated with 9th Ed Melta and Harlequins.

Looking at the TC, they should only be available if you take "line" Leman Russes. I'd like their orders to give manouevre/tactical buffs such as advancing and firing, falling back and firing and perhaps a For the Greater Good style overwatch mechanic? I would prefer this to rerolls etc. The range on their orders should be buffed up.

Anyhoo.

You know, GW used to have an armored company (eventually armored battlegroup) Army List that handled this pretty well at the time.

And to be frank, we could handle it the same way, but it would require changing the game slightly bigly.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
You know, GW used to have an armored company (eventually armored battlegroup) Army List that handled this pretty well at the time.

And to be frank, we could handle it the same way, but it would require changing the game slightly bigly.

I played back then, and I would rather not go back to pre-8th lists and rules. That is, of course, a separate argument from this thread. In any case you can have an all-Leman Russ army in 9th. You can even give those Leman Russ Obsec in a Spearhead Detachment.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
You know, GW used to have an armored company (eventually armored battlegroup) Army List that handled this pretty well at the time.

And to be frank, we could handle it the same way, but it would require changing the game slightly bigly.

I played back then, and I would rather not go back to pre-8th lists and rules. That is, of course, a separate argument from this thread. In any case you can have an all-Leman Russ army in 9th. You can even give those Leman Russ Obsec in a Spearhead Detachment.

I was referring mostly to the way army building worked. You were, at most, allowed 2 tank commanders per Tank Company, given the army building rules - and that's easily sufficient for a Company CO tank and a Company 2iC tank without allowing Tank Commanders to simply take the place of regular Russes. You also had Tank Aces, which were separate and distinct Elites choices, and then tank squadrons as troops choices (1-2 tanks per troops choice, rather than 1-3, go figure).

Then there was the Aces High special rule possessed by the army list, which said that when buying Doctrines, wargear, and upgrades, the Tank Commanders had to have the most (or be tied for the most), followed by the Tank Aces, followed by regular tanks. So you could not have a regular tank more expensive or with more upgrades than a Tank Commander or Tank Ace, etc. This meant Tank Commanders were always more expensive than a basic russ, which put a slight amount of pressure to turn that Company CO/Company XO pair into just a Company CO.

I wonder if a VEHICLE version of a Vox-Caster upgrade could solve the clumping issue - give the option to give a TC and LR a 5 point upgrade that extends the range Orders can be give to/from.

Not sure whether to stick with the current Vox range of 18" or go to 24", but it'd help. And making it optional means it doesn't have to be baked into the base cost of a LR if you wanted to field one without a TC (assuming they were worth it like that, of course).

One thing that hasnt been touched on, giving the leman russ and TC a bonus to melee, maybe like a special rule that demonstrates the leman russ being a bit of a behememoth/juggernaught just running over infantry models, maybe just a flat 4+ WS 3 attacks strength 7 maybe ap -1, slight buff, and/or give it that charge rule where it can give mortal wounds on a 4+

bat702 wrote:
One thing that hasnt been touched on, giving the leman russ and TC a bonus to melee, maybe like a special rule that demonstrates the leman russ being a bit of a behememoth/juggernaught just running over infantry models, maybe just a flat 4+ WS 3 attacks strength 7 maybe ap -1, slight buff, and/or give it that charge rule where it can give mortal wounds on a 4+

That would be cool and all, but it doesn't really address any of the current issues. Having an okay-ish close combat ability doesn't really make a Leman Russ better at its primary jobs, which I would assume are damage and surviving.

Although that does bring an interesting question. What should the main priority of a Leman Russ actually be? Should it be very sturdy with okay damage, or should it just have reasonable durability (probably about what it is now), but do a bunch of damage? I think I lean towards the former.

How about both durable and powerful like it used to be, and then add a point cost to match?

And have the durability and power come from the statline, rather than rules.

The old way was that the Russ was stat-line powerful; AV14 with a battlecannon was pretty intimidating. Other tanks got durability from special rules, e.g. Eldar tanks (AV12 with smaller guns). Eldar tanks had Lance and Fast Skimmer/Holofields to balance things out, but it felt like the correct dichotomy (e.g. IG achieve parity through brute force and capability, while Eldar resort to shenanigans).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
How about both durable and powerful like it used to be, and then add a point cost to match?

And have the durability and power come from the statline, rather than rules.

The old way was that the Russ was stat-line powerful; AV14 with a battlecannon was pretty intimidating. Other tanks got durability from special rules, e.g. Eldar tanks (AV12 with smaller guns). Eldar tanks had Lance and Fast Skimmer/Holofields to balance things out, but it felt like the correct dichotomy (e.g. IG achieve parity through brute force and capability, while Eldar resort to shenanigans).

So what would your Leman Russ stat line look like? How about the weapon profile (for simplicity's sake, let's assume just the Battle Cannon for now)? I think that figuring out what the Russ should look in pure stats will allow you to point it, and then using that profile, you can figure out what additional rules or stats the Tank Commander should have, along with the points increase.